JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC has been filed by the accused appellants Badri Prasad Meena and Dhara Singh (who subsequently died and on an IA No. 25632/2017 having been filed by Abhishek S/o late Dhara Singh seeking leave to continue the appeal, application was allowed and he was permitted to continue the appeal) against the judgment dated 25.2.2015 passed by Sessions Judge, Alwar in Sessions Case No. 130/2014, whereby while acquitting the accused appellants for the offence under Section 5(g) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, they have been convicted for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5000/- each; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 year's simple imprisonment.

2. Facts of the case, as per the prosecution, are that on 17.7.2012, the complainant Ramesh Chandra submitted a written report at Police Arakshi Kendra, Tehala, District Alwar, wherein it was mentioned that on 4.7.2012 at about 8.00 AM he went to mines to work there and his wife Kamli also went for NREGA labour work. At about 11.00 AM, his younger daughter Mst. T.B. went to the mines to hand over food to her father and after handing over food to him, she departed, but did not reach home. He searched for Mst. T.B., but could not find her. On enquiry, his elder daughter Mst. M.B. informed that teachers Dhara Singh and Badri Prasad who used to teach them in Tilwadi, had given a Mobile Phone with SIM No. 9166899217 to them. They used to talk on the aforesaid Mobile Phone. It was also submitted that when telephone calls were made at the aforesaid mobile number, the mobile phone was found switched off. The complainant's daughter Mst. T.B. was stated to be about 15 years of age and she was alleged to have been kidnapped by the aforesaid two persons (accused appellants).

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, the police registered FIR No. 98/2012 at Police Station, Tehala, Distt. Alwar for the offence under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and investigation was commenced. After completion of investigation, the police submitted a charge sheet against the accused appellants Dhara Singh and Badri Prasad for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC.

4. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajgarh framed charges against the accused appellants Dhara Singh and Badri Prasad for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, which was denied by them and claimed for trial.

5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses and exhibited documents. The accused appellants were examined under Section 313 CrPC.

6. Since the case was related to the offence punishable under Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (henceforth, ‘the Act of 2012’), which is triable by Sessions Court, the case was transferred from the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajgarh to the Court of Sessions for trial.

7. After hearing arguments, the learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 25.2.2015 while acquitting the accused appellants for the offence under Section 5(g) readwith Section 6 of the POCSO Act, convicted them for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and sentenced them, as indicated above.

8. We have heard learned counsel for the accused appellants and learned PP appearing for the State.

9. At the out-set, Mr. N.A. Naqvi, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mukesh Kumar Meena, Advocate and Mr. Syed Adeel Naqvi, Advocate submits that during the pendency of appeal, accused appellant Dhara Singh expired on 7.11.2017. Accordingly, an application under Section 394 CrPC was filed by his son Abhishek Meena (IA No. 25632/2017) seeking leave to continue the appeal, which was allowed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 5.2.2018. Amended cause title was also filed, which was taken on record.

10. Learned counsel further submits that there are two prosecutrix in this case namely Mst. T.B. and M.B. He further submits that as per the statement of PW-1 Mst. M.B., her date of